The problem – being able to interact with your hands with a 3D hologram

The issues

When you put your hand into a hologram, and grab something and move it away, how does the computer know what you’re aiming at?

I guess this is a problem of 3D space, and knowing exactly

– what is being displayed

– where each pixel of light is

– a 3d model of the hand

For example, if someone is touching a cube that is displayed in midair, we need to know all the points of the cube, and where they exist in the 3D space of the real world. So we imagine that the cube is a physical cube. Once we know it exists, we need to model other 3D objects that exist in that 3D world, such as a hand. Once we have a hand modelled and mapped to the 3D world, we can then model these two 3D objects interacting with each other, even though one isn’t real (this doesn’t matter).

So now that the computer knows where two objects are, that doesn’t mean to say a person knows where his hand is in relation to an object. This depends on their perspective, i.e. where their head is in relation to their eyes, in relation to the object they’re interacting with.

The next thing is to make sure we’re interacting with the object we think we’re interacting with. For instance, we could be touching one box, but it’s really in the position of the second box. This is because of the angle that we’re viewing this from. So we need to look at the person that is interacting with an object, and trace a line from their sight of vision to their hand to the object they are touching.

Resourcer graphs/screenshots

I’m working on how to present data entered into Resourcer.I’ve been playing around with Excel and thinking about how to represent:

  • Tasks done;
  • Their utilisation level;
  • Time spent on each task.

Here’s a mock up of a typical day at work:

graph

At a glance you can see that tasks with low utilisation levels are either relatively small or relatively large, while tasks where I am busy or very busy are around the 60 minute mark.

Why no one likes your web application…

The usability sucks. I hate to say it, but it’s true, and it’s causing your site to lose money. As designers/programmers/business analysts, we often focus on features rather than the end user like Apple’s iPhone.

What made consumers drool over the iPhone? It wasn’t features, like the Nokia N95. The iPhone can’t even do Picture Messaging. It was of course, the User Interface. People camped outside waiting in line to order an iPhone because of how the application interacted with the user. Do they do this with your web application?

Probably not. Web 2.0 is making many nice looking websites, but so what? Popular websites are generally:

  1. Free. It’s the future of business.
  2. Simple. Twitter is txt-messaging for the web.
  3. Focused on the user. Why else is Basecamp so successful?

So here’s my call to action: I’m going to work on making Sovietbadges.co.nz easier to use. It should be like using Dell.com. What are you going to do?